Got Screwed by Chimeny Liner Company - Need your help please

pilot-werx said:

Now I am not sure who is more full of BS... The guy who originally put my liner in came back to my house to meet with me. He got out his lights, mirrors and measuring tapes.... He ended up leaving five tiles in place and that did not make sense to me after he knocked out everything above. His reasoning was this... My wood stove is flue runs right alongside a fireplace hearth. He was afraid that while knocking out the remaining five tiles he would damage the fire box of the fireplace. I inspected the tiles that were left with his mirrors and cameras and they all looked fine. But he agreed, that I should of made the decision whether to leave them or not. So, he got up on the roof, and in about 15 minutes had the tiles knocked out and will be back this week with the material to insulate the rest of the liner...

At the end of the day, I am not sure who to believe... The people who brought the issue to me told me they had to rent an air hammer to get the last five tiles out because they were cemented to the chimney?

Click to expand...

Webmaster said:

DanCorcoran said:

It's interesting to read this thread juxtaposed with another thread about the old Kent woodstove that is illegal in Oregon. There's one contingent of folks that thinks that regulations and certification stand in the way of personal freedom, and another contingent that believes they can help the unknowledgable from getting burned (so to speak). Is it still possible to have a middle ground in this country...?

Click to expand...

Well, in the realm of codes and people giving advice on here, you will usually hear the perfect......

But my comment about the above is simply this - reality is often different that what we quote from the regs! I would guess that a VASTLY larger percentage of chimney liners have been installed with no insulation at all.....let alone insulation where they go through existing flue tiles.

From a practical viewpoint, I cannot imagine much of a problem with a ventinox liner going though even a cracked tile which is surrounded by a decent masonry structure........

As to code, which I certainly try not to give advice contrary to code and instructions and owners manuals, this simple fact remains. ANY code or fire official could probably walk into 95% of houses in the country and find large lists of things which do not meet one code or another!

Some if it is semantics. Other parts are practicality. There may be little of no room inside a tile to put insulation and a liner.

In short, many "in the field" jobs become compromises of one sort or another. The real questions here are:
1. Is it safe?
2. Does it contribute to any major problem which is occurring?
3. Were you charged for more than you got?

As to the first two, it seems from afar that your problem(s) have little to do with the liner not being insulated down there.

But if they priced out the liner and insulation, it is done "per foot" and they owned you either a refund or an explanation when they did it (which most homeowners would accept)......

So it appears, at minimum, you have a claim against them for the installed cost of insulation and what it would have cost to remove those tiles.

I'll leave it up to you and others as to whether you think you need to seek other remedies.

Click to expand...

Webmaster said:

DanCorcoran said:

It's interesting to read this thread juxtaposed with another thread about the old Kent woodstove that is illegal in Oregon. There's one contingent of folks that thinks that regulations and certification stand in the way of personal freedom, and another contingent that believes they can help the unknowledgable from getting burned (so to speak). Is it still possible to have a middle ground in this country...?

Click to expand...

Well, in the realm of codes and people giving advice on here, you will usually hear the perfect......

But my comment about the above is simply this - reality is often different that what we quote from the regs! I would guess that a VASTLY larger percentage of chimney liners have been installed with no insulation at all.....let alone insulation where they go through existing flue tiles.

From a practical viewpoint, I cannot imagine much of a problem with a ventinox liner going though even a cracked tile which is surrounded by a decent masonry structure........

As to code, which I certainly try not to give advice contrary to code and instructions and owners manuals, this simple fact remains. ANY code or fire official could probably walk into 95% of houses in the country and find large lists of things which do not meet one code or another!

Some if it is semantics. Other parts are practicality. There may be little of no room inside a tile to put insulation and a liner.

In short, many "in the field" jobs become compromises of one sort or another. The real questions here are:
1. Is it safe?
2. Does it contribute to any major problem which is occurring?
3. Were you charged for more than you got?

As to the first two, it seems from afar that your problem(s) have little to do with the liner not being insulated down there.

But if they priced out the liner and insulation, it is done "per foot" and they owned you either a refund or an explanation when they did it (which most homeowners would accept)......

So it appears, at minimum, you have a claim against them for the installed cost of insulation and what it would have cost to remove those tiles.

I'll leave it up to you and others as to whether you think you need to seek other remedies.

Click to expand...

Ivy said:

Any other lawyers posting on this thread other than me?
Didn't think so.

"Code" refers to the state building code, not to national building codes.

National building codes are meaningless unless a state has adopted said code.

BTW - "Code" is fanciful lawyer talk for "law." In most cases. So, for example, the federal tax laws are located in the IRC, which is the Internal Revenue Code.

If you want to know what the building code is in Maine, you have to look at Maine law (code), and all the references in this thread to other codes would be, most likely, completely irrelevant in a Maine court.

It's possible - in fact likely - that Maine has adopted some or all of the various national codes.

I'm not doing the legwork, but check out this link, which seems to suggest that Maine has not, in fact, adopted uniform codes . . .http://www.maine.gov/spo/specialprojects/buildingcodes/index.htm

Click to expand...